Comments

Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year's election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Guess he's tired of Peruvian food? And he's got no credibility left if he now claims he can prove it wasn't the Russians after claiming, apparently falsely, that submissions to his site are completely anonymous and even he would never know where the documents came from or who submitted them. Why wouldn't he interview with the FBI for immunity?

i guess the New Yorker article, which I'm reading now, is too close to home? Impeached for violations of FICA, money laundering, tax evasion and violation of banking regulations. Follow the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment. 755+1.

Brilliantly disappearing headlines. Seeing how the WSJ has a paywall up and it's not likely that posters here get the paper delivered. Follow the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment. #755+1+7Xs

The reality, as you would find out if you read further into the story,
is that the boast from Felix Sater that somehow the construction of a
Trump Tower in Moscow would demonstrate Trump’s international business
prowess and thus help his election was meaningless. What the incident
really shows is that the Trump organization had little or no pull in
Russia as Putin’s government apparently didn’t lift a finger to salvage
this stillborn building project.

However, leaving aside the Times’ propagandistic approach to Ukraine,
there is this more immediate point about Russia-gate: none of Sater’s
boastful claims proved true and this incident really underscored the
lack of useful connections between Trump’s people and the Kremlin. One
of Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, even used a general press email
address in a plea for assistance from Putin’s personal spokesman.

Deeper in the story, the Times admits these inconvenient facts:
“There is no evidence in the emails that Mr. Sater delivered on his
promises, and one email suggests that Mr. Sater overstated his Russian
ties. In January 2016, Mr. Cohen wrote to Mr. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitri
S. Peskov, asking for help restarting the Trump Tower project, which had
stalled. But Mr. Sater did not appear to have Mr. Peskov’s direct
email, and instead wrote to a general inbox for press inquiries.”

The Times added: “The project never got government permits or
financing, and died weeks later. … The emails obtained by The Times make
no mention of Russian efforts to damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign or
the hacking of Democrats’ emails.”

In other words, the Russia-gate narrative – that somehow Putin
foresaw Trump’s election (although almost no one else did) and sought to
curry favor with the future U.S. president by lining Trump’s pockets
with lucrative real estate deals while doing whatever he could to help
Trump win – is knocked down by these new disclosures, not supported by
them.

Instead of clearing the way for Trump to construct the building and
thus – in Sater’s view – boost Trump’s election chances, Putin and his
government wouldn’t even approve permits or assist in the financing.

But the actual evidence suggests something quite different. Besides
Flynn’s relatively modest speaking fee, it turned out that RT negotiated
Flynn’s rate downward, a fact that The Washington Post buried
deep inside an article on Flynn’s Russia-connected payments. The Post
wrote, “RT balked at paying Flynn’s original asking price. ‘Sorry it
took us longer to get back to you but the problem is that the speaking
fee is a bit too high and exceeds our budget at the moment,’ Alina
Mikhaleva, RT’s head of marketing, wrote a Flynn associate about a month
before the event.”

But that recognition of reality would undermine the much beloved story
of Putin-Trump collusion, so the key facts and the clear logic are
downplayed or ignored – all the better to deceive Americans who are
dependent on the Times, the Post and the mainstream media.

“I used to spend a lot of time in this room...back when it was a shit hole
and I was a shit head.”

big·otˈbiɡət/ noun: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

big·ot·ryˈbiɡətrē/ noun: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

The reality, as you would find out if you read further into the story,
is that the boast from Felix Sater that somehow the construction of a
Trump Tower in Moscow would demonstrate Trump’s international business
prowess and thus help his election was meaningless. What the incident
really shows is that the Trump organization had little or no pull in
Russia as Putin’s government apparently didn’t lift a finger to salvage
this stillborn building project.

However, leaving aside the Times’ propagandistic approach to Ukraine,
there is this more immediate point about Russia-gate: none of Sater’s
boastful claims proved true and this incident really underscored the
lack of useful connections between Trump’s people and the Kremlin. One
of Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, even used a general press email
address in a plea for assistance from Putin’s personal spokesman.

Deeper in the story, the Times admits these inconvenient facts:
“There is no evidence in the emails that Mr. Sater delivered on his
promises, and one email suggests that Mr. Sater overstated his Russian
ties. In January 2016, Mr. Cohen wrote to Mr. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitri
S. Peskov, asking for help restarting the Trump Tower project, which had
stalled. But Mr. Sater did not appear to have Mr. Peskov’s direct
email, and instead wrote to a general inbox for press inquiries.”

The Times added: “The project never got government permits or
financing, and died weeks later. … The emails obtained by The Times make
no mention of Russian efforts to damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign or
the hacking of Democrats’ emails.”

In other words, the Russia-gate narrative – that somehow Putin
foresaw Trump’s election (although almost no one else did) and sought to
curry favor with the future U.S. president by lining Trump’s pockets
with lucrative real estate deals while doing whatever he could to help
Trump win – is knocked down by these new disclosures, not supported by
them.

Instead of clearing the way for Trump to construct the building and
thus – in Sater’s view – boost Trump’s election chances, Putin and his
government wouldn’t even approve permits or assist in the financing.

But the actual evidence suggests something quite different. Besides
Flynn’s relatively modest speaking fee, it turned out that RT negotiated
Flynn’s rate downward, a fact that The Washington Post buried
deep inside an article on Flynn’s Russia-connected payments. The Post
wrote, “RT balked at paying Flynn’s original asking price. ‘Sorry it
took us longer to get back to you but the problem is that the speaking
fee is a bit too high and exceeds our budget at the moment,’ Alina
Mikhaleva, RT’s head of marketing, wrote a Flynn associate about a month
before the event.”

But that recognition of reality would undermine the much beloved story
of Putin-Trump collusion, so the key facts and the clear logic are
downplayed or ignored – all the better to deceive Americans who are
dependent on the Times, the Post and the mainstream media.

So all the players, including Trump, should have no problem a, either testifying before congress in open hearings or answering subpoenas from Mueller or b, answering any subsequent charges, whether in criminal court or impeachment hearings, and clearing their names, right? It's all a 4th estate witch hunt, right? 7Xs.

Rather than condemn the press for how they report the "facts," I'll eagerly await Mueller's report and Trump's subsequent impeachment. Email is not the only method of communicating potential quid pro quos. 7Xs.

And, I think by showing how awful a situation it is down there, maybe it's helping people donate to the relief effort.

Well, sure it should be covered extensively, but I have to agree that it shouldn't be the only story covered. The situation in one American state does not outweigh what is happening everywhere else in the world. To think otherwise is pure American hubris.